US foreign policy is now medieval

THE search continues for a framework to make sense of, or at least label, the baffling state of world affairs since Donald Trump took his second oath of office as president of the United States.

- ANDREAS KLUTH

PRESIDENT Donald Trump received a replica of a historic golden crown from South Korean president Lee Jae Myung. The gold-plated gift, decorated with trees and animals, is based on the ancient Silla Kingdom's gold crown. At the ceremony in Gyeongju, South Korea, Trump was also awarded South Korea's highest honour, the Grand Order of Mugunghwa.

And now we have a new contender: Neo-royalism. At first - and even second — glance, I'd say it fits.

First, a recap of some of the “isms” that have clearly failed. Trump is obviously not an isolationist because, for starters, he keeps bombing foreign countries — provided they’re weak enough not to return more than token fire. Currently, he’s considering a second go at Iran.

Nor is he a realist, because too many things he does — from waging random trade wars to insulting allies or letting China have state-of-the-art American microchips — hurt rather than help the national interests of the United States.

Trump definitely is a transactionalist. But that label just implies that he thinks in short-term deals rather than strategy — as one of his former national-security advisors puts it, that his foreign policy is “an archipelago of dots, unconnected by chords of logic.” While the description fits, it has little analytic value.

Some -isms that do pack a punch come from the field of psychology rather than international relations and also have limited utility. Narcissism, for instance. (*) It explains much about Trump’s leadership: his constant projection of grandiosity and need for flattery, among other things. But other world leaders and American presidents have also exhibited signs of narcissism, and we generally don’t name eras after the trait.